Search age:

Search in:

TAFEs seek federal support on cuts

Bianca Hall

AUSTRALIA's 61 TAFE directors have expressed their joint alarm at ''savage'' cuts to the Victorian sector, saying the cuts highlight flaws in national agreements designed to boost enrolments.

TAFE Directors Australia's annual meeting will now bring the fight to protect the sector's funding to the federal government. The resolution follows the Victorian government cutting funding to about 80 per cent of publicly funded courses, which the sector warns will lead to classes closing and jobs lost.

On Saturday The Age revealed federal Tertiary Education Minister Chris Evans wrote to his Victorian counterpart, Peter Hall, asking him to urgently explain how those cuts would not threaten national reforms agreed to at the Council of Australian Governments meeting in April.

At that meeting the states and territories agreed to nationally binding reforms that would double diploma enrolments by 2020 and funnel $1.75 billion in federal funding to the states and territories - including almost $900 million to New South Wales and Victoria.

Advertisement

TAFE Directors Australia chief executive Martin Riordan told the annual meeting the dispute between the federal government and Victoria had emerged because the COAG agreement had merely set out ''principles'' that would help the agreement be reached.

''Clearly the savage cuts make it unclear how in detail these can be delivered,'' Mr Riordan said. ''Certainly equity educational targets [to] which COAG had also earlier committed, to double the number [of] degrees, and significantly lift skill qualifications … will be at risk.''

He said the Victorian example showed that, without clear guidance, states could slash courses while getting millions in federal funding under the COAG agreement.

Yesterday he wrote to Prime Minister Julia Gillard and the states and territories, urging them to adopt four principles to secure the sector's future. They include adequate funding, enhancing quality standards, flexibility and responsiveness, and recognising the unique roles of TAFE.

Last Thursday, Senator Evans wrote to Mr Hall to ask him to urgently explain how the cuts would not affect the state's capacity to meet the COAG reforms. Without mentioning specific threats, Senator Evans said the $434.8 million in Victorian funding due to flow to the state was ''subject to the terms of the agreement being met''.

But Mr Hall's office said Victoria would meet all its obligations under the National Partnership Agreement.

On Monday the Productivity Commission said if the COAG reforms were realised, they would boost gross domestic product by 2 per cent by 2020, and cut unemployment by 0.35 per cent.

Yesterday the University of Ballarat vice-chancellor, David Battersby, said the projected funding cuts to the university's TAFE was about $20 million. ''This represents a 40 per cent decline in funding,'' he said.

Professor Battersby said the university would close up to 60 vocational education and training programs.

With BENJAMIN PREISS

14 comments

I am a TAFE student in a growth industry, one in which there is a skills shortage. I have a young family and study p/t, because I can't afford to study f/t. Already, in a funded place, I need to pay almost $2,500 per year to study 12 hours per week in the evenings and pay for books, materials and excursions etc on top of that.

I do not qualify for any other government support in the form of AuStudy etc because I am unable to study f/t.

I'm really concerned about these funding cuts and the impact it will have on myself and other students in my situation. How much of an increase are we going to experience in our fees? How many will drop out and not finish their courses? What skills crises will be caused by this?

Will it also create an inequality between the States / Territories in the quality of teaching provided?

A skilled workforce is essential to any economy. The reason countries such as the UK are suffering at the moment is because they've largely moved away from this and their economy has become reliant on finance and services.

If we want Australia to remain financially secure, surely we should be supporting those in education, particularly where it is skills based, and getting these people out into the workforce.

Commenter

mummypig

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 8:53AM

The rot started with the competitive funding model

Commenter

shemp

Location

melb

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 9:10AM

In all of this news about "TAFE cuts" nothing mentioned about increases in funding to private RTO's. TAFE can never compete with RTO's as the TAFE teachers teach 21 hours a week and private colleges expect their teachers to teach......32 hours a week, with 8 hours for assessments and prep. 11 hours week, every week adds up pretty quickly. Worst of all, TAFE teachers expect the same pay rises as Primary and High school teachers who work much harder and put in more hours.....

Commenter

shemp

Location

melb

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 9:17AM

Sorry Shemp... not sure I quite get your point? Can you clarify please? :)

Commenter

mummypig

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 9:45AM

The point is that the private RTO's are being funded at the same rate as TAFE. This means that there will be more places in private RTO's now. As TAFE is an expensive business for government, with all the red tape and highly unionised work force, they priced themselves out of the picture, so the govt started playing with the funding models in 2009. This funding shift was initially embraced by Brumby as Victoria was the "test case state".....The Libs are just ramping it up! Also $2500.00 per year isn't a huge cost to pay towards your future, (there is VET fee help available as well) as you will become qualified and hopefully get a better job, which hopefully means, better income. Try post graduate study where its more like $2500.00 a subject x 4 subjects a year x 3-4 years! Then factor in the undergrad cost component as well.Unfortunately education became a business a long time ago.......

Commenter

shemp

Location

melb

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 10:14AM

Shemp - I agree that $2500 pa isn't much to pay for an education that should benefit me financially in terms of a better job when I re-enter the workforce.

That's wasn't my point. The point is $2500 is already too costly for both me and thousands of others who have reduced incomes. If you don't qualify for a funded place, as many don't, that means paying $10,000 plus per annum for a diploma course.

VET-FEE Help is only available to those who are citizens or on permanent humanitarian visas AND who would not be eligible for a funded place. Some might also have a 20% loan fee included.

My concern is that, for those of us who are not eligible for VET-FEE Help, that the cuts to TAFE funding will result in us being required to pay more in fees per annum and for many of us, being unable to finish our courses as a consequence.

A multiple tier system has been created where those with the lowest incomes, in particular women who have had time out of work for motherhood, are having their access to eduction severely limited in order to allow private companies to make more money in the guise of "market competition".

Quality education should be a right for all, not just those who can afford the fees.

Commenter

mummypig

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 11:02AM

How removing funding from education per se is considered a good move is beyond me.

Then we'll be importing skilled labour because we aren't skilled sufficiently.

Short term RTOs will just follow the funding.Long term TAFE institutions will close down.

It's very short sighted IMO.

Commenter

Gee Emm

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 9:32AM

In reply to Shemp he/she obviously doesn't know what being a TAFE teacher is like. Bogged down in admin duties, acting as student counsellors, providing job advice, dealing with employers, maintaining vocational currency and much more, all with lack of job security. I have heard much about what generous conditions TAFE teachers have, but compare their wages against the average wage, consider the high rate of casual employment, consider the many stresses involved in dealing with students with "issues". As for TAFE teachers only teaching 21 hours per week, how many hours does a secondary teacher teach - about the same. Surveys looking at qualifications and work experience of TAFE teachers have also shown them to be similar in "capability" to their secondary counterparts. The likely consequence of losing so many TAFE teachers due to the Victorian State Govt. budget cuts in a time of skilled labour shortages can only be very detrimental to both Victoria and Australia.

Commenter

Harry

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 10:07AM

Harry, with a 21 hour a week teaching load, (not including deductions for other activities, like prep, assessments, co-ordination) the pastoral duties are actually part of your role as a teacher. Then you have the weekly non attendance day, which means one day off campus doing what you like!!Hmm lets see, 4 days a week at approx 60K, a year not including annual leave, public hols and term breaks! Quick question,can you point out out where is there "job security"? Is it in private industry? no wait, public service? no wait, there isn't any, so welcome to real world!. Finally, Primary and Secondary teachers teach 5 days a week, 9-3.30 and usually get there at approx 8-8.30 and leave approx 4.30-5pm, and then do prep and assessment on top, they don't get NAD's, so please..... PS I spent almost 20 years in the system, but when competitive funding came in....I retrained and left........best thing I did...... .....

Commenter

shemp

Location

melb

Date and time

May 16, 2012, 11:17AM

Since the changes in 2010, many TAFE's have had to rely on sessional / temporary contracted teachers who may be working in their chosen profession, then teaching at one, or even 2 TAFE's, in order to make enough money to live.

Plus, time for class prep, marking etc and make themselves available to students.

I know some who have taught at RTOs and certainly do NOT have long hours or prep to do, because they're expected to put in as little time as possible to maximise income.

I know fellow students who have studied at an RTO to get an advanced diploma in one year without paying a thing because the RTO ran the classes free for Aus residents who qualified for funding.

Funding that was stripped from the TAFEs.

The quality of teaching that they received at the RTOs was so deficient that they then opted to pay FULL course fees of $10,000 plus per annum at TAFE to get another diploma in the same thing!

I know employers who refuse to hire RTO "graduates" because they don't always have the level of knowledge expected and end up costing employers in further training.

TAFEs need increased funding to ensure teachers can provide the quality education they want to give, without risking their own health, and so that students can benefit from this without having to commit themselves to years of future debt.